Read the following passage and choose the most likely answer to each of the following questions.
University of Chicago economist Milton Friedman had a favorite saying: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.” His point was that when governments provide goods and services, someone has to provide the money, knowingly or not. But if he were around today and living in San Francisco, he might have to modify his words. There, it’s possible to make nearly every meal a free meal.
Big tech companies have figured out a way to keep employees happy—and keep them at the office working hard. The trick is in-house “dining halls” that offer an array of dining options for breakfast, lunch, dinner and snack time. Best of all for their workers, the food is free. There are 51 of these cafeterias around San Francisco, with Twitter, Google and Square among the hosts.
But the future of free meals is in doubt. Two city supervisors are sponsoring a measure to forbid any more such establishments. Existing ones would be allowed to continue, but new companies that want in-house dining would actually have to charge employees for the food.
The critics argue that the dining halls put nearby restaurants at a huge disadvantage. “You can’t compete with free,” Gwyneth Borden, executive director of the Golden Gate Restaurant Association, told the San Francisco Chronicle. They are also claimed to dry up street life, prevent workers from interacting with their neighbors and deprive retail shops of walk-in customers. “We don’t want employees biking or driving into their office, staying there all day and going home,” Supervisor Ahsha Safai explained.
Plenty of cities would love to have such “problems” to deal with. Business Insider recently ranked San Francisco and nearby San Jose the two strongest local economies in the country. The tech boom has forced firms to compete for employees by offering varied benefits. These benefits make it easier for workers to bear the chief burden of living there—the high cost of housing, fueled by all the people drawn by the hot job market.
Every peach has its pit. But it’s hard to argue that new employers should be prevented from giving workers something of value—particularly when their established competitors are allowed to. And let’s not forget that the in-house dining halls provide employment for food service workers, distributors and farmers. Imposing a ban might help local restaurants and shops by getting more people out of the office. But it would also give tech firms a reason to locate elsewhere, depriving San Francisco of their expenditures and tax payments.
In time, employees may find the in-house dining arrangements claustrophobic（导致幽闭恐惧症的）.As one San Francisco tech veteran told us, “It’s one of those things that sounds great when you’re getting recruited, but the shine wears off pretty quickly.”
Smart tech companies might offer workers meal allowance or vouchers（抵用券）so they can eat out instead—and maybe reduce their risk of burnout from spending too much time at the office. Nearby restaurants could find ways to work with these employers instead of fighting them.
Butting in（干涉）to stop companies from giving things of value to their workers is a heavy-handed remedy for a doubtful problem. Surely the people governing San Francisco are not that starved for ideas.
Why would many cities love to have such “problems” in Paragraph 5?（ ）
A、
Having such problems shows a city’s attraction for high-tech talents.
B、
Having such problems indicates the strength of a city’s economy.
C、
These problems are easier to deal with compared with others.
D、
These problems help to bring down the high cost of living.
【正确答案】：B
【题目解析】：
本题考查很多城市希望有这样的“问题”的原因。
根据题干回文定位到第五段。分析语境，”Business Insider最近将旧金山和附近的圣若泽列为该国两个最强大的地方经济体。科技繁荣迫使企业通过提供各种福利来竞争员工。这些福利让工人们更容易承担住那里的主要负担——由火热的就业市场吸引的所有人推动的高昂住房成本。“这表明了这些问题表示一个城市的经济实力的增强。故选B。